Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.

Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

I definitely find that the graphics and mechanics of some older games turn me off to replaying them, but then there are some that are just so good that I can't NOT replay them.

Fallout definitely falls into this category for me, as do a lot of older PC and even SNES games. The thing I have the hardest time with is trying to go back and play PS1 games, because damn are those primitive polygons ugly as hell.

I'm going to have to come down on the side of new games. I've scarcely touched my PS2 in the past year, because I've been having too much fun on my 360, PC, and Wii. I can count the number of games on the NES that I'd actually play through to completion today on maybe 1 hand. After the gameplay innovations in RE4 and the Siren series, I find it difficult to play the older survival horror games that I used to love. I tried to play Fallout 1 for the first time a couple weeks ago and I couldn't get past the first hour or two: the concept intrigued me, but the visuals & user interface were too annoying.

But enough bagging on older games. Let's talk about what makes a game timeless. I'd say there are 3 major categories.

1 - Simple, perfected fun. Games like Pac-Man: Championship Edition & Lumines would fall under this category. Sure, these games aren't much more complex than your average Flash game, but every aspect of the game has been fine-tuned to the point where there's not much you could do to improve them in a major way.

2 - Great games that haven't been obsoleted yet. These are games that could easily be improved upon if a skilled development team actually set out to do so, but nobody's bothered so far. Something like Master of Magic would fall under this category: the graphics & interface are ancient, but nobody's bothered to make a better Fantasy/Civilization hybrid since then. I'd also put most the JRPG genre in general under this category: the reason why so many 16-bit JRPGs are considered highly playable even today has less to do with the quality of those games and more to do with the fact that the genre hasn't evolved much since then.

3 - Games as art. These are games that have an artistic vision. Even if the gameplay in similar games advances to the point of rendering them mostly obsolete as games (see Silent Hill 2), they're still worth playing for their artistic vision. Games like Rez, Shadow of the Colossus, Portal, and Breath of Fire: Dragon Quarter would fall under this category.

I've been in the habit of collecting these retro collections that are becoming more and more common.

I picked up Art of Fighting and Fatal Fury at TRU for like, $4 each. Those collections have about three or four games in it that would cost hundreds of dollars if you purchased them on their original console.

Then we have the Mega Man collections (Classic and X), Street Fighter Anniversary, Sega collections, Capcom collections, Devil May Cry, Metal Gear Solid, and so on. It's easy to see that's where "retro" gaming is going.

Five or ten years down the road, I wouldn't be surprised to see some of our newest games packaged into one pack for a low price (Bioware RPG collection, anyone?).

I don't get why some people "hate" others that still enjoy some of the old, classic games. Why are you an "idiot that needs to grow up" because you occasionally like to revisit classic games like Super Mario Bros 3, Sonic the Hedghog 2, Mega Man 2, Bionic Commando, Contra, PacMan, Galaga, or even not-as-old games like Street Fighter II or Last Blade, or games like Mega Man X, or Super Metroid?

There is this little bunch of people that think people who enjoy these old games are complete idiots.

I think that's ridiculous. Look, most old games are shit. But guess what? Most new games are shit too.

The fact is, if a game has a great, well-executed gameplay mechanic, then it is going to stand the test of time. Yes, the graphics may age, but it can still be fun to play. Heck, if graphics are well executed, even those can stand the test of time.

Just because most old games are shit doesn't mean that all old games are shit, and it doesn't mean that you're an idiot because you like to play the good ones.

Just as another great example: I would also like to add that Street Fighter 3 is a game that is still considered one of the best fighting games ever created, and not only does it still hold up gameplay-wise, and control-wise, but graphically as well.

Just as another great example: I would also like to add that Street Fighter 3 is a game that is still considered one of the best fighting games ever created, and not only does it still hold up gameplay-wise, and control-wise, but graphically as well.

Yup.

One of my classes got canceled so I had like 4 hours of straight downtime between classes yesterday. There was never less then five people standing around the Street Fighter III machine and for those 4 solid hours there was never a moment when there weren't two people playing against each other.

To throw further fuel on the old games are good fire, there are people that still swear by Street Fighter II and play it to this very day.

Just as another great example: I would also like to add that Street Fighter 3 is a game that is still considered one of the best fighting games ever created, and not only does it still hold up gameplay-wise, and control-wise, but graphically as well.

Yup.

One of my classes got canceled so I had like 4 hours of straight downtime between classes yesterday. There was never less then five people standing around the Street Fighter III machine and for those 4 solid hours there was never a moment when there weren't two people playing against each other.

To throw further fuel on the old games are good fire, there are people that still swear by Street Fighter II and play it to this very day.

And that's what I was going for. Street Fighter II or III are good because they are well-crafted games, not because they are old games. There are plenty of games from the same era, even other fighting games, that are utter arse. They might've sold well or been popular at the time, but are rubbish now. Then you get one or two, as you will today, that will still stand out in years to come.

I think there is a difference between "still play" and will "start playing." There are plenty of old games that I used to play that I'll go back and play. There are far fewer that I haven't played before that I've gone back and actually enjoyed enough to play through.

I think there is a difference between "still play" and will "start playing." There are plenty of old games that I used to play that I'll go back and play. There are far fewer that I haven't played before that I've gone back and actually enjoyed enough to play through.

I picked up Street Fighter III for the first time about a year and a half ago, and it's much older then that. (not sure how old, exactly).

But yeah, it can be very tough to go back to an older game without that extra push from nostalgia.

0·

DarmakIf someone is reading this...I must have failed.Registered Userregular

Just as another great example: I would also like to add that Street Fighter 3 is a game that is still considered one of the best fighting games ever created, and not only does it still hold up gameplay-wise, and control-wise, but graphically as well.

Yup.

One of my classes got canceled so I had like 4 hours of straight downtime between classes yesterday. There was never less then five people standing around the Street Fighter III machine and for those 4 solid hours there was never a moment when there weren't two people playing against each other.

To throw further fuel on the old games are good fire, there are people that still swear by Street Fighter II and play it to this very day.

And that's what I was going for. Street Fighter II or III are good because they are well-crafted games, not because they are old games. There are plenty of games from the same era, even other fighting games, that are utter arse. They might've sold well or been popular at the time, but are rubbish now. Then you get one or two, as you will today, that will still stand out in years to come.

I don't think anybody here is arguing that certain games are good because they're old, they're good because they're well-made and just happen to be old.

I think there is a difference between "still play" and will "start playing." There are plenty of old games that I used to play that I'll go back and play. There are far fewer that I haven't played before that I've gone back and actually enjoyed enough to play through.

We see it pretty much any time there is a sequel to an old classic. Check the Fallout thread for many, many people going back to play the original for the first time - and enjoying it! Happens with lots of other franchises, too. The new game sparks an interest in the older games. Those older games that stand the test of time will be played and loved by those new players.

I think there is a difference between "still play" and will "start playing." There are plenty of old games that I used to play that I'll go back and play. There are far fewer that I haven't played before that I've gone back and actually enjoyed enough to play through.

We see it pretty much any time there is a sequel to an old classic. Check the Fallout thread for many, many people going back to play the original for the first time - and enjoying it! Happens with lots of other franchises, too. The new game sparks an interest in the older games. Those older games that stand the test of time will be played and loved by those new players.

But the opposite also exists. Like me, I was like "Ooh, this new Fallout game looks pretty cool and GameTap just got the first one, let's give it a try!" and then giving up after a couple hours because I just wasn't having much fun. The clunky interface and old graphics ruined the game for me.

EDIT: I don't hate old games, but I have enough trouble finding enough time to try to keep up with all of the worthwhile new games. An old game has to be truly exceptional (or have major nostalgia value for me) for it to find its way in my schedule.

I think there is a difference between "still play" and will "start playing." There are plenty of old games that I used to play that I'll go back and play. There are far fewer that I haven't played before that I've gone back and actually enjoyed enough to play through.

We see it pretty much any time there is a sequel to an old classic. Check the Fallout thread for many, many people going back to play the original for the first time - and enjoying it! Happens with lots of other franchises, too. The new game sparks an interest in the older games. Those older games that stand the test of time will be played and loved by those new players.

But the opposite also exists.

Of course. Not everyone is going to like something just because it's considered a classic. I'd certainly not argue otherwise.

For the most part, I prefer retro games and newer games that adhere to concepts gleaned from the classics. I also prefer 2D games to 3D games, and I think most games should have bosses. Whenever I hear people say things like "There's no reason to produce 2D games for the current generation of hardware" or "Bosses are an outdated concept", I get highly ticked off.

For the most part, I prefer retro games and newer games that adhere to concepts gleaned from the classics. I also prefer 2D games to 3D games, and I think most games should have bosses. Whenever I hear people say things like "There's no reason to produce 2D games for the current generation of hardware" or "Bosses are an outdated concept", I get highly ticked off.

To throw further fuel on the old games are good fire, there are people that still swear by Street Fighter II and play it to this very day.

Yes, a great deal in fact. I just happened to be watching some interviews last night on G4 On Demand on Street Fighter 4 and the main focus the people behind it have is to keep it like SF2. I can remember the guy's name but he said that if someone says that this game plays like SF2, then he considers it a great compliment.

To throw further fuel on the old games are good fire, there are people that still swear by Street Fighter II and play it to this very day.

Yes, a great deal in fact. I just happened to be watching some interviews last night on G4 On Demand on Street Fighter 4 and the main focus the people behind it have is to keep it like SF2. I can remember the guy's name but he said that if someone says that this game plays like SF2, then he considers it a great compliment.

I just can't comprehend this mind set. Even the best, most enjoyable game becomes tiresome for me after so long spent playing it. At that point it's only good for the very occasional replay.

I don't think the ratio has changed in the slightest. I think we have about the same amount of gold to shit as we always have.

I agree. I think that now that we have the Internet it's much easier to see what games are shit than we did when we were kids. I know when I was a kid, the only selling point for a game was the cover (or if I knew who was in the game: TMNT, Mario, etc). Unfortunately that made for a LOT of terrible games.

Two weeks ago, my best friend and I sat down in front of the TV and had an absolute blast playing King of Fighters '94 on the Virtual Console, and that's not even a particularly good older game!

It's true that people who seek out older games won't be as numerous as people who want the latest and shiniest, but that's true of all media, so who cares?

I know what you mean.

N64 is not 'old nintendo'. the fucking megadrive/genesis is not 'classic sega'.

Final Fantasy 7 is not old final fantasy. heck, ill bet 90% of the FF fanbase have not played any of the games 1 thru 6 or even heard of them outside of the logical assumption that 7 was the 7th one in the series.